User talk:Deltagammaz

File:RenTech Contract.pdf listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:RenTech Contract.pdf, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Wikiacc (¶) 01:15, 15 January 2021 (UTC) Wikiacc (¶) 01:15, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021

Hello, I'm GretLomborg. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on VirnetX, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. You should not add people's address to articles like you did here [1], especially if it's only sourced to public records information.

It's usually not appropriate to cite to primary sources like public records or lawsuits. Also, many of the edits you made to that article included consisted of irrelevant, off-topic information. GretLomborg (talk) 23:08, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@GretLomborg: I disagree with your change. Let's settle this on this talk page of Virnetx. See you there :) Deltagammaz (talk) 23:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matthew Granade (January 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nightenbelle was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I have posted my reference review of all 49 references on the talk page, but I just want to say- this page is a perfect example of refbombing and a publicity piece of a person where only 1 source even remotely comes close to establishing notability- the rest only show he works for a company that is probably notable. The rest of these references are pointless in this context and do not show this person should have a page. Most of the sources are just stuck after a sentence and don't actually contribute information supporting the piece other than the person's name and job title. I believe the creator of this article would do better to create an article about the company and mention Mr. Granade in passing on that article rather than try to create a page for him specifically.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Matthew Granade and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Matthew Granade, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Nightenbelle (talk) 22:16, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Deltagammaz! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Nightenbelle (talk) 22:16, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Better source request for File:Clover Health CID.png

Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:

File:Clover Health CID.png

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete or generic . Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact source (such as web page, or printed document) where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain, search engine, pinboard, aggregator, or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. Wikiacc (¶) 00:49, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons. The material you added to VirnetX [2] violates the WP:OR and WP:BLPPRIMARY polices. Two editors have already made it clear to you that this material is inappropriate in the talk page [3], please do not reintroduce it again. GretLomborg (talk) 05:10, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Geoff Lewis (businessman) has been accepted

Geoff Lewis (businessman), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Noah!^💬 22:19, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Scott Shleifer (March 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Praxidicae was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Scott Shleifer and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Scott Shleifer, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CUPIDICAE💕 19:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Geoff Lewis (businessman) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Geoff Lewis (businessman), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geoff Lewis (businessman) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at George Hotz. Github is not a secondary source appropriate to an allegation about a living person. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 09:11, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Cindy Eckert. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 09:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently editing contrary to numerous policies and guidelines, including but not restricted to the policies on biographies of living persons, on sources, and on edit-warring, continuing despite countless warnings over the course of about eight months. You have never shown any interest in taking on board what you have been informed concerning Wikipedia policies, and you regularly simply dismiss messages purely on the grounds that you personally don't like those policies. It is astonishing that you have got away with this for so long without being blocked long ago. If you are to return to editing you will need to convince an administrator that you will radically change your approach.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. JBW (talk) 11:37, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Deltagammaz (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was disappointed to wake up to this notice. I have been an active member of the Wikipedia community for about a year in that time editing 500+ pages and cleaning up many pages that did not align with WP policies. I have showed myself to be an active and kind member of the community. Let's start with the George Hotz article. I am not sure if you read the sources but they back up my claims. Hotz published an article on the Cheapeth page regarding the situation (the article I ref'd). The Github page links to his official account linking to the page. Then Cindy Eckert. I added in that Valeant Pharmaceuticals collapsed under a fraud and pricejacking scandal. Read the wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bausch_Health. That explains much of the scandal. I never added in my 'opinion' only facts. Valeant did collapse under a pricejacking and fraud scandal. Saying anything else would not be accurate. I will admit I could have done a better job citing my sources to back up my claims for both pages. I believe that over the past year I have showed myself to fit all of the values that Wikipedia cares about and therefore I deserve a second chance. Deltagammaz (talk) 14:41, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Since, as noted below, your account is now globally locked, there is no point to further entertaining your unblock request as it is no longer within our power to do so, and this is not the place (and any further request here will cost you talk page access for the same reason). Have a nice day. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:03, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Note to any administrator reviewing this unblock request: I have received a message suggesting that this editor may be a sockpuppet of the sockpuppeteer at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kbs987/Archive. For a combination of reasons I am not able to look into that in detail now, but you may like to check if you are considering unblocking. I have no idea whether it's true. JBW (talk) 15:19, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They're globally locked now anyway. CUPIDICAE💕 15:26, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that information, @CUPIDICAE:. In that case the reviewing administrator doesn't need to check the SPI. In fact I think I could IAR and decline the unblock request myself, but I think I'll leave it. JBW (talk) 16:54, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Kendall Larsen

Hello, Deltagammaz. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kendall Larsen, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:01, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Kendall Larsen

Hello, Deltagammaz. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Kendall Larsen".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Eternal Shadow Talk 20:13, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]